Moore’s Law

Ok, so this Mooooore guy:

He is a very revolutionary thinker, has been an accurate predicter of our computer programming’s history, and furthermore predicts that the complexity, “for minimum component costs” will exponentially increase. What he’s saying (i believe) is that the size per capita of necessary circuits is becoming smaller and effectively more useful per area. Now the details of his prediction have slightly altered as time proceeds; the prediction went from a increasing by a factor biannually- to doubling every two years.

Then the following articles about Moore’s Law gets interesting (comparably).  Who doesn’t love a scandal- or rather a clash of ideas about …computers. Their are varying camps of belief about the future of semiconducter circuits and its fate in the relevance of our society. Some say it will stay on track within the frame of Moore’s Law and come to a halt in a future when circuits will be at the molecular level; you cannot go smaller than the scale of an atom. This is fine and all because its clean cut, and there is no confusion- but there are some futurists out there that want to throw a wrench in the natural order of things and say that progression might extend past “integrated-circuit technology” into new forays of scientific achievements.

Now who really knows what generation will come up with what pioneering invention? I know: nobody. Therefore the only thing i can really analyze is how Wikipedia contrasted the page of Moore’s Law, with the page on Murphy’s Law

The reason Moore’s Law is increasingly admired is because it is the optomistic counterpart of a widely accepted philosophy represented by Murphy’s Law: if something can go wrong, it will. You cannot relate these two philosophies (although i am biased because i think a lot of people who argue philosophy are delusioned because they obsess over their own thoughts and supposed brilliance) Whoever wrote this article set up the arguement in his boundaries, which are dumb. If you think only one concept can hold true, ” “Moore’s law is a violation of Murphy’s law. Everything gets better and better,” you are not thinking rationally, in the slightest. They used “Moore’s Law” to represent “progress” as a whole- things will inevitably improve upon the last model as time goes on. There’s no balance at all in this black vs white clash of philosophies, and yet nobody believes life is one way or the other. Murphy’s Law is more or less an excuse for when bad things happen, “well it was bound to happen,” yes bad things will happen, eventually, no one’s argueing that one. They are not mutually exclusive, otherwise if Moore’s Law applied to everything, life would not be as much of a pain as it is right now typing this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: